On the origin of the ultradeep East Barents Sea basin
Very large subsidence, with up to 20 km thick sediment layers, is observed in the East Barents Sea basin. Subsidence started in early Paleozoic, accelerated in Permo-Triassic times, finished during the middle Cretaceous, and was followed by moderate uplift in Cenozoic times. The observed gravity sig...
| Published in: | Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , |
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2012
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JB008533 https://serval.unil.ch/notice/serval:BIB_309BE75C4EBE |
| Summary: | Very large subsidence, with up to 20 km thick sediment layers, is observed in the East Barents Sea basin. Subsidence started in early Paleozoic, accelerated in Permo-Triassic times, finished during the middle Cretaceous, and was followed by moderate uplift in Cenozoic times. The observed gravity signal suggests that the East Barents Sea is at present in isostatic balance and indicates that a mass excess is required in the lithosphere to produce the observed large subsidence. Several origins have been proposed for the mass excess. We use 1-D thermokinematic modeling and 2-D isostatic density models of continental lithosphere to evaluate these competing hypotheses. The crustal density in 2-D thermokinematic models resulting from pressure-, temperature-, and composition-dependent phase change models is computed along transects crossing the East Barents Sea. The results indicate the following. (1) Extension can only explain the observed subsidence provided that a 10 km thick serpentinized mantle lens beneath the basin center is present. We conclude that this is unlikely given that this highly serpentinized layer should be formed below a sedimentary basin with more than 10 km of sediments and crust at least 10 km thick. (2) Phase changes in a compositionally homogeneous crust do not provide enough mass excess to explain the present-day basin geometry. (3) Phase change induced densification of a preexisting lower crustal gabbroic body, interpreted as a mafic magmatic underplate, can explain the basin geometry and observed gravity anomalies. The following model is proposed for the formation of the East Barents Sea basin: (1) Devonian rifting and extension related magmatism resulted in moderate thinning of the crust and a mafic underplate below the central basin area explaining initial late Paleozoic subsidence. (2) East-west shortening during the Permian and Triassic resulted in densification of the previously emplaced mafic underplated body and enhanced subsidence dramatically, explaining the present-day deep basin ... |
|---|